COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX Vs. CARYAIRE EQUIPMENTS INDIA PVT. LTD.
LAWS(ALL)-2012-10-233
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on October 31,2012

COMMISSIONER, COMMERCIAL TAX Appellant
VERSUS
Caryaire Equipments India Pvt. Ltd. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The present revision under section 11(1) of the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 has been preferred against the judgment and order dated August 23, 2003 passed by the U.P. Commercial Tax Tribunal, Lucknow, in Appeal No. 36 of 2003. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee established a new unit and made the capital investment of fifteen devices/systems relating to air-conditioning for its sales, of which only 10 items were being manufactured. For ten items, production was carried out in a rented shed situated at C-81A, Sector-8, Noida and for the remaining five items, the production was started in another factory situated at C-80A, Sector 8, Noida. Later, both the sheds were purchased by the assessee. In addition to the ten items, an additional capital investment of Rs. 1,44,58,113 was made by the assessee for evaporative unit, air-ventilator unit, filter apparatus, air control devices including spare parts, etc. The assessee made a claim for the additional capital investment and the concerning authorities have granted the eligibility certificate for grant of the exemption from payment of tax equal to 150 per cent of the additional fixed capital investment of Rs. 1,34,37,160, i.e., up to Rs. 2,01,55,740 was granted to the assessee between the period February 27, 1998 to September 23, 2005, whichever is earlier.
(2.) Later, the assessee, made a review application stating that its unit is covered both under the expansion as also the diversification scheme and, as such, under the Explanation clause 4, sub-section (D), the assessee is entitled for eligibility certificate on 50-50 per cent basis of the additional fixed capital investment for exemption and also for diversification, but the review application was rejected by the Chief Executive Officer, Noida, vide his order dated February 22, 2003. Being aggrieved, the assessee has filed an appeal before the Tribunal, who has allowed the claim of the assessee. Not being satisfied, the Department has filed the present revision.
(3.) With this background, heard Sri Sanjeev Shankdhar, learned standing counsel for the Department and Sri Bharat Ji Agrawal, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned counsel for the assessee.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.